-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Carl George <carl(a)redhat.com>
Reply-To: EPEL Development List <epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
To: EPEL Development List <epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: [EPEL-devel] Re: and about missing binary packages Re:
proposed recommendation - missing devel packages
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 17:08:04 -0500
Yes, this would also apply to that scenario. You can create a
lame-epel package that has a lame subpackage, as long as none of the
files conflict with lame-devel and lame-libs from RHEL8. You would
also want to relax the requirement on lame-libs by removing the
%{release}, so that way you can bump the release on the epel package
and still have the requirement satisfied by the RHEL lame-libs.
-Requires: %{name}-libs = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: %{name}-libs = %{version}
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 5:31 PM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
Hi,
Sorry, this may be a little Off-topic but we notice that lame package
from RHEL 8 (1) is not shipping lame package with binaries and in
this
case lame-devel is provided along with lame-libs , can we apply the
same rules ? is completely a different situation ?
(1)
https://git.centos.org/rpms/lame/blob/c8/f/SPECS/lame.spec
On Thu, 2021-07-01 at 15:05 -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> I believe this is a recommendation, versus a policy.
> I wanted to get people's thoughts on it, and if ya'll like it, put
> it
> in the documentation.
> ----
> In Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 8, Red Hat decided to not ship
> all
> packages that are built from RHEL spec files. This will also be
> true
> of RHEL 9, and possibly future RHEL releases. These missing
> packages
> are usually -devel packages and may impact an EPEL package build.
> If your EPEL package is impacted by a missing -devel package, do
> the
> following.
>
> 1 - Request the package be added to RHEL 8 and 9 CRB repository.
> -- To initiate this process, please file a bug in
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com and request it be added to RHEL 8 and
> 9.
> Report the bug against the "CentOS Stream" version of the "Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux 8" and/or "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9" product.
> -- Be sure to say that it is impacting an EPEL build, and which
> package
> it is impacting.
>
> 2 - Create an epel package that only has the missing packages.
> -- Be prepared to maintain this package as long as it is needed.
> -- It is recommended that you name it <package>-epel
> -- It is recommended that you add the epel-packaging-sig group as a
> co-
> maintainer
> -- It qualifies for an exception to the review process[1] so you
> can
> request the repo with
> --- fedpkg request-repo --exception <package>-epel
> -- If you need help building this, ask for help. We have some
> examples.
>
> 3 - When/If the missing package(s) are added to RHEL CRB, retire
> your -
> epel package.
>
> ---
> Sorry, this is a little rushed. I wanted to get something out
> sooner,
> rather than later.
>
> Troy
>
> [1] -
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuideline...
> - Third bullet point
--
Sérgio M. B.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
epel-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproj...
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Carl George
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
epel-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
--
Sérgio M. B.